vk_use_cabinet

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true), the description discloses that switching changes the active cabinet and that credentials from the selected cabinet are used by future calls. This is useful behavioral context about persistent session state.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is minimal and front-loaded: it states the core action and consequence in the first sentence, then documents the only argument. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple one-parameter state-switch tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior, the meaning of the parameter, and where to find valid inputs. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has zero description coverage, but the description compensates by defining 'name' as 'the cabinet to activate' and directing the agent to vk_list_cabinets for valid values. For a single-parameter tool this is sufficient, though more detail about name format would be stronger.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Switch the active cabinet.' It clearly states the state-changing effect and that 'subsequent API calls use its credentials.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vk_list_cabinets or vk_add_cabinet.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implicitly tells the agent when to use it: before subsequent cabinet-specific API calls, and it points to vk_list_cabinets as the source for valid names. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for correct selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.